More Like this

1. Sperm and alternative reproductive tactics: a review of existing theory and empirical data

   https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0075  

   Kustra, Matthew C.; Alonzo, Suzanne H. (December 2020, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences)

   null (Ed.)

   Males that exhibit alternative reproductive tactics (ARTs) often differ in the risk of sperm competition and the energetic trade-offs they experience. The resulting patterns of selection could lead to between-tactic differences in ejaculate traits. Despite extensive research on male ARTs, there is no comprehensive review of whether and what differences in sperm traits exist between male ARTs. We review existing theory on ejaculate evolution relevant to ARTs and then conduct a comprehensive vote-counting review of the empirical data comparing sperm traits between males adopting ARTs. Despite the general expectation that sneaker males should produce sperm that are more competitive (e.g. higher quality or performance), we find that existing theory does not predict explicitly how males adopting ARTs should differ in sperm traits. The majority of studies find no significant difference in sperm performance traits between dominant and sneaker males. However, when there is a difference, sneaker males tend to have higher sperm performance trait values than dominant males. We propose ways that future theoretical and empirical research can improve our understanding of the evolution of ejaculate traits in ARTs. We then highlight how studying ejaculate traits in species with ARTs will improve our broader knowledge of ejaculate evolution. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Fifty years of sperm competition’. 

   more » « less
2. How Do Users Experience Moderation?: A Systematic Literature Review

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3610069  

   Ma, Renkai; You, Yue; Gui, Xinning; Kou, Yubo (September 2023, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction)

   Researchers across various fields have investigated how users experience moderation through different perspectives and methodologies. At present, there is a pressing need of synthesizing and extracting key insights from prior literature to formulate a systematic understanding of what constitutes a moderation experience and to explore how such understanding could further inform moderation-related research and practices. To answer this question, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) by analyzing 42 empirical studies related to moderation experiences and published between January 2016 and March 2022. We describe these studies' characteristics and how they characterize users' moderation experiences. We further identify five primary perspectives that prior researchers use to conceptualize moderation experiences. These findings suggest an expansive scope of research interests in understanding moderation experiences and considering moderated users as an important stakeholder group to reflect on current moderation design but also pertain to the dominance of the punitive, solutionist logic in moderation and ample implications for future moderation research, design, and practice. 

   more » « less
3. Advancing the scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes: a co-produced research agenda

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-022-00132-8  

   Eaton, Weston M.; Burnham, Morey; Robertson, Tahnee; Arbuckle, J. G.; Brasier, Kathryn J.; Burbach, Mark E.; Church, Sarah P.; Hart-Fredeluces, Georgia; Jackson-Smith, Douglas; Wildermuth, Grace; et al (December 2022, Socio-Ecological Practice Research)

   Abstract Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research–practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among ‘on-the-ground’ practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes. 

   more » « less
4. Early year undergraduate researchers’ reflections on the values and perceived costs of their research experience

   https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00248-x  

   Ceyhan, Gaye D.; Tillotson, John W. (December 2020, International Journal of STEM Education)

   Abstract Background Prior research reported that motivational beliefs that individuals attach to specific tasks predict continuing interest and persistence in the task. A motivational approach may be particularly useful for understanding undergraduate students’ engagement with research in their first and second years in college. The current study utilizes the expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation to qualitatively explore how much and in what ways early year undergraduate researchers value their research experience and what kinds of costs they associate with it. Results The results revealed that intrinsic value had the highest expression in participants’ motivation to engage in research. The second most expressed value type was the utility value of undergraduate research with regards to obtaining the desired outcomes, and attainment value played the least important role in participants’ motivation to engage in research. Findings also indicated that some of the participants associated a cost(s) to their research experience. The highest mentioned perceived cost was opportunity cost, where participants commented on losing other valued alternatives when engaging in research. Participants commented on the time, effort, or amount of work needed to engage in research, and a few participants commented on the emotional cost associated with their research experience in terms of the fear of failure. Conclusion As perceived cost is the least studied in the expectancy-value framework, this study contributes to cost values within college students, particularly about early year undergraduate researchers. The findings of this study can form the basis for future work on exploring ways to increase the values and decrease the costs students experience in their undergraduate research experiences. 

   more » « less
5. Applying CS0/CS1 Student Success Factors and Outcomes to Biggs' 3P Educational Model

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3626252.3630781  

   Salguero, Adrian; Villegas_Molina, Ismael; Elizabeth_Margulieux, Lauren; Cutts, Quintin; Porter, Leo (March 2024, Proceedings of the Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) Technical Symposium)

   Over the past decades, computer science education (CSEd) research has studied the multitude of factors that may impact student success in introductory programming courses (CS0/CS1). The lack of foundational structure behind how these factors interrelate has made it difficult to gain a thorough understanding of this area of CSEd literature. Gaining a deeper understanding and applying structure to these factors would allow CSEd to adopt better teaching practices, study habits, learning environments, course materials, etc. and to better understand the student experience to better foster success among a broader population of students. Our systematic literature review used search criteria for factors that predicted student success in CS0/CS1, which yielded 311 research articles. We then mapped this body of work under the Biggs' 3P (Presage, Process, Product) educational model, which provides a comprehensive framework for how students engage with learning opportunities. We discovered that although many studies focused on the Presage and Product phases of the model, fewer studies mapped to the Process phase, which describes the students' active learning processes. Our study shows there is a potential gap in the literature and future studies should focus more specifically on how students choose to engage with learning opportunities and what factors may be hindering that engagement throughout a learning period. 

   more » « less